On Mon, Feb 13, 2017 at 06:01:29PM +0000, Mark Brown wrote: > On Sun, Feb 12, 2017 at 06:32:49PM -0800, Dmitry Torokhov wrote: > > > v2: restored lost regulator_disable() stub > > > Mark, note that there is also patch introducing devm_clk_prepare() and > > devm_clk_prepare_enable() that Russell did not hate so I think it will > > get applied eventually. I believe lack of CLK methods was cited as a > > reason for not having managed enable for regulators. > > No, that's never been an issue. The concern is partly that nobody > bothered writing the patch but also that it gets messy over suspend and > resume since you end up with drivers either doing explicit releases of > managed resources (which is not normally a good pattern) or mixing > managed and unmanaged access to the same resource which is also fun.
I see where you are coming from, but I think that it is lesser concern than mixing managed and unmanaged resources in probe() and remove() and making sure that release order is right when they are mixed like that. I think it is helps if you think about devm_regulator_enable and regular regulator_enable as managed and unmanaged *actions*, not resources. So managed action of enabling regulator will be undone on remove() and you have to manually undo unmanaged regulator_disable() on resume(). It is not worse than having unbalanced regulator_enable/disable between probe()/suspend()/resume()/remove(). Thanks. -- Dmitry
